Letters To The Editor

May 24, 2001

Opting out of school to work

The words of an old song, "Please release me let me go, I don't love you anymore" may well be applied to many of our students who attend public schools.

State law requires the student to receive 12 years of education. The trend over the past decade has shown an increase in expulsions, dropouts and a general disregard of many to have a desire for learning and improving upon oneself.

The ability of the governing to change the rule and enhance the learning capacities of those children who want to learn in many cases are being shortchanged.

Parents and educators know when a student has reached his or her capacity to continue the learning process. When this level is reached the student normally from eighth grade on becomes a detriment to the class, teacher and the administration.

The solution is simple. When the student reaches the age of 16 he or she can opt out of the state-run school system and go to work. The state can issue a Certificate of Attendance and release the student from the system.

The school, the students, administration and the taxpayers will benefit through the reduction in class size and the ability to provide more opportunity for those who want to learn and improve their scholastic abilities.

So when the song is heard Mr. Superintendent, "Pleez release me, let me go, I don't wanna lern anymor," present the certificate to the student who knows more than the teacher and wants to become a member of the workforce. Good luck, former student. When you return, you will be paying your own way.

Howard Mowry

Gloucester Point

Landscape-challenged

Many months ago much time, and apparently money, was spent on landscaping for the median area known as Mercury Central.

It has never looked good. The area has weeds and brown grass much of the year.

I hoped giving it time would be the answer. Now, some two years later, there are still weeds and brown grass.

When will be median areas look well kept?

Pat Cagle

Hampton

Worth his millions

Regarding the jealous-hearted and envy-burdened detractors of Michael Vick.

This young man owes no apologies for his outstanding athletic abilities that have earned him millions.

Our entertainment industry is just a reflection of America's lopsided values. If the CEOs are willing to pay him millions, think what they are planning on making off him?

I am not a football fan, but I do appreciate and respect Vick's abilities.

I cannot say the same for those who strut about chanting vulgar lyrics or the girls who gyrate on stage in various stages of undress pretending to sing.

Howard Cosell once said, "We Americans have never been known for our culture nor our literary pursuits."

Give Vick his millions. In America he is worth it.

It's the basic law of supply and demand.

Don L. McMonigal

Surry

Give and take

Reference the Wednesday, May 16 letter "Governing philosophies," a little self-examination might be in order.

Bob Farland says that liberals want more programs costing all of us more tax dollars. Let's look at some other facts. Each time an American takes a "deduction" for home interest, this is a tax subsidy by the government. This is no different than, say a tax subsidy in the form of a welfare check or food stamps.

The only real difference is that the homeowner has a home. Most people on welfare don't. This makes buying a home from a real estate company or financing it from a bank beneficial to them, too. But without tax-deductible interest, people would still buy homes because, as you point out, we would all have more income "to spend as we see fit."

When oil companies, tobacco farmers and even our own shipyard get tax subsidies, we liberals have to pay more taxes to make up for those subsidies and so do conservatives.

Imagine how much lower everyone's taxes would be if just those four subsidies were done away with? Farland said Republicans "only want to protect the citizens, maintain a stable economy, and ensure we have a credible defense."

How do those big business subsidies fit into that definition?

All of these programs help all of us.

I have no problem knowing that the less fortunate have a place to sleep and their children have food.

I'm not overly fond of supporting the big businesses listed above, but I understand give-and- take, unlike some conservatives who believe in take.

David C. Walsh

Hampton

2,000-year-old truth

Beate Rose wrote on May 18, ("Lighthouse of freedom," letter) that "The idea that Jesus is coming one day on a cloud to save only those who believe in him is a new idea for me."

There is nothing new or radical about that statement. Why should Jesus come back for those who don't believe in him? Jesus welcomes all who choose him, but he doesn't force anyone to believe. He invites us.

If this idea isn't popular in Germany, it's because Germans choose not to believe a 2,000-year- old truth.